This is odd (or I’m missing something). Why would standalone Sodium-ion batteries (UN3551) be MORE regulated than small standalone Lithium-Ion batteries of the same wattage?

I’ve been working on the latest updates to our lithium battery wizard, which is an interactive application that covers all modes of transport. It’s kind of a pain in the butt to police because there’s about 50 different possible endpoints depending upon the mode of transport, the configuration, and the power, and the battery, and everything.

Anyway, I was just invited down another rabbit hole. When my instructional designer asked me to look at this and I noticed that a small stand-alone sodium ion battery requires UN specification packaging.  There’s no mystery there. It says it right at the bottom of packing instruction 976.

But let’s say I have a 80 Wh Lithium-Ion battery that is also standalone, Shipped under UN3480. If it’s below 100 Wh, it doesn’t require UN spec packaging as it shipped under 965-IB.

So now that I’m working through this, I guess the answer is obvious, and you can let me know if I’m on the wrong track. But the answer seems to be that nobody really asked for a IB section of PI 976. And 976 simply requires UN specification packaging.

It just bugs me a little bit because I try to explain things to customers in a rational common-sense way, and when I tell them that yes, lithium ION batteries are regulated and require UN specification packaging, especially when they’re shipped on their own, but not if they’re less than 100 Wh.

But sodium ion batteries of the same wattage? They have a tougher packaging requirement.

UN3480 99.9999 Wh = Strong Outer Packaging, drop and stack test (965-IB)
UN3551 99.9999 Wh = UN specification / tested packaging. i.e. 4G or 4GV

hashtag#IATADGR hashtag#IATACBTA hashtag#DGTRAINING hashtag#SODIUMION hashtag#STATEOFCHARGE
hashtag#STATEOFCONFUSION